On November 6th, a Memorandum of Understanding for the management of incoming migratory flows to and from Italy was signed between Rome and Tirana. Whether it can be considered good and right seems legitimate to harbor some, and perhaps more, doubts, but the Government's activism at the level of foreign policy, conducted without a precise common thematic thread teleologically directed towards the achievement of a pre-established project of affirmation within a varied and even differently configured international community in relation to specific issues of potential common interest, could, conversely, have a negative impact on the internal level, leading to the rapid political decline of the forces that form the current government majority for be, that same majority, in difficulty in translating on a practical level what was a constant slogan of the Secretary of the League only until some time ago, i.e. the well-known "Italians first" which had animated and unequivocally oriented within the ballot box large part of the electorate.
Between possible external relational naivety (such, at least, is the feeling that emerges from it) and apparent (because it still seems to be such) how probably restricted internal decision-making foresight, the action recently implemented, together with the reformism announced on the constitutional level , could represent the first signs of difficulty of the current (centre) right government complex which has been orphaned by President Silvio Berlusconi. Moreover, the Renzian experience should serve as the cornerstone of teaching on the subject.
In other words: if it is true that the next opening, as well as the management of the two Centers for Migrants in Albania foreseen by the now much talked about Memorandum of Understanding signed by our President of the Council of Ministers and the Albanian Complementary Edi Rama, will be completely borne by the Italy, which according to what we read will be called upon to make a substantial cash outlay, what would be the real advantage for our country which is already severely affected on an economic level? It seems that the provision of Centers that are not better defined and regulated, but apparently ad hoc, is useful rather than for a realistic practical-resolution aspect, in justifying, transforming it, the impossibility of implementing the original vaunted "block naval", transposing it through a not very successful assimilation on the level of a "forced transfer" whose legitimacy seems legitimate to doubt. Since the very management of such structures also seems to have to be entirely the responsibility of Italy, which should also assume exclusive responsibility, it would not have been better, and probably more economical considering the humble calculation of the servant, to design the centers in the national territory as was originally planned? You ask for a friend as is often said.
